IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/doj/eagpap/200710.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consumer Learning, Switching Costs, and Heterogeneity: A Structural Examination

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew Osborne

    (Economic Analysis Group, Antitrust Division, Department of Justice)

Abstract

I formulate an econometric model of consumer learning and experimentation about new products in markets for packaged goods that nests alternative sources of dynamics. The model is estimated on household level scanner data of laundry detergent purchases, and the results suggest that consumers have very similar expectations of their match value with new products before consumption experience with the good, but once consumers have learned their true match values they are very heterogeneous. I demonstrate that resolving consumer uncertainty about the new products increases market shares by 24 to 58%. The estimation results also suggest significant switching costs: removing switching costs increases new product market shares by 12 to 23%. Using counterfactual computations derived from the estimates of the structural demand model, I demonstrate that the presence of switching costs with learning changes the implications of the standard empirical learning model: the intermediate run impact of an introductory price cut on a new product’s market share is significantly greater when the only source of dynamics is switching costs as opposed to when both learning and switching costs are present, which suggests that firms should combine price cuts with introductory advertising or free samples to increase their impact. Because my model includes two different types of dynamics, I am able to assess the impact of ignoring learning or switching costs on the model’s imputed long run price elasticities by reestimating the model assuming that one of these dynamics is not present. I find that ignoring learning will i) lead to underestimates of the own price elasticities of new products by 30%, ii) will underestimate the cross-price elasticities between new and established products by up to 90%, iii) will overestimate the cross-price elasticities of established products by up to 15%. Ignoring switching costs will lead to underestimates of own price elasticities of up to 60%, and underestimates of crossprice elasticities of up to 90%.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew Osborne, 2007. "Consumer Learning, Switching Costs, and Heterogeneity: A Structural Examination," EAG Discussions Papers 200710, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.
  • Handle: RePEc:doj:eagpap:200710
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.justice.gov/atr/public/eag/227376.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sofia Berto Villas-Boas & J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 2008. "Learning, Forgetting, and Sales," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1951-1960, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ribeiro, Ricardo, 2010. "Consumer demand for variety: intertemporal effects of consumption, product switching and pricing policies," MPRA Paper 25812, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Jean-Pierre Dubé & Günter J. Hitsch & Peter E. Rossi, 2010. "State dependence and alternative explanations for consumer inertia," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 417-445.
    3. Praveen K. Kopalle & Yacheng Sun & Scott A. Neslin & Baohong Sun & Vanitha Swaminathan, 2012. "The Joint Sales Impact of Frequency Reward and Customer Tier Components of Loyalty Programs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 216-235, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:doj:eagpap:200710. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Tung Vu). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/atrgvus.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.